首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Literature and Science >Review of Bruno Strasser’s “The Experimenter’s Museum: GenBank, Natural History, and the Moral Economies of Biomedicine
【24h】

Review of Bruno Strasser’s “The Experimenter’s Museum: GenBank, Natural History, and the Moral Economies of Biomedicine

机译:布鲁诺·斯特拉瑟(Bruno Strasser)的“实验者博物馆:GenBank,自然历史和生物医学道德经济学的评论”

获取原文
       

摘要

In 2007, Lorraine Daston and Peter Galison observed that "epistemic virtues do not annihilate one another like rival armies. Rather, they accumulate." Moreover, "When epistemic virtues confront one another, so do scientific selves [. . .] Where one side sees a breach of scientific integrity, another may see loyalty to the discipline's highest standards" (Objectivity. Brooklyn: Zone Books, 2007: 363, 367). This analysis succinctly summarises the main argument of Bruno Strasser's article, which is a natural companion piece to the history of the scientific 'atlas' that Daston and Galison have so richly described. Strasser's article about the construction in the 1980s of GenBank, an open-access digital repository of nucleic acid sequences, weaves a narrative around a clash between the experimental and natural-historical scientific traditions. That narrative is compelling, and the argument intriguing. The article connects the rise of the computer database with the natural-historical collecting traditions, from early modern Wunderkammer to Victorian museums and botanic gardens. It carefully and thoroughly documents the intellectual, inter-personal struggle that resulted in the creation of GenBank and the emergence of what Strasser describes as a "hybrid culture" in which the experimental method that produced individual sequences was combined with the natural-historical method of collation (61, 96). This "hybrid culture" of practices, he argues, signalled the end of the "predominantly experimental tradition" in the life sciences (96). Its coming into being involved the sometimes fractious encounters of individual scientists and their respective institutions. This scientific cultural antagonism centred on differences of received opinion about the ethics of scientific credit, attribution, and rights of ownership. If a hundred scientists create a hundred DNA sequences, can the collector of all one hundred make a proprietary claim on the collection. What rights do the individual producers of those sequences retain
机译:在2007年,洛林·达斯顿(Lorraine Daston)和彼得·加里森(Peter Galison)观察到,“具有美感的美德并没有像敌军一样消灭对方,而是在不断积累。”此外,“当认识的美德彼此对立时,科学的自我也会如此……在一方认为违反科学诚信的情况下,另一方可能会忠诚于该学科的最高标准”(客观性。布鲁克林:Zone Books,2007:363) (367)。这种分析简洁地总结了布鲁诺·斯特拉瑟(Bruno Strasser)的文章的主要论点,这是达斯顿(Daston)和加里森(Galison)如此丰富地描述科学“地图集”历史的自然伴侣。 Strasser的文章关于1980年代GenBank的构建,GenBank是一种开放的核酸序列数字存储库,围绕实验性和自然历史性科学传统之间的冲突编织了叙述。这种叙事令人信服,论点也很有趣。本文将计算机数据库的兴起与自然历史收藏传统联系起来,从早期的现代维德卡默博物馆到维多利亚时代的博物馆和植物园。它仔细而透彻地记录了导致GenBank创立以及Strasser所描述的“混合文化”的知识分子,人际交往的斗争,在这种混合文化中,产生单个序列的实验方法与自然历史方法相结合。排序规则(61,96)。他认为,这种实践的“混合文化”标志着生命科学中“主要是实验传统”的终结(96)。它的出现涉及个别科学家及其所属机构有时的艰难遭遇。这种科学文化上的对立集中在对科学信用,归因和所有权权利的道德观念的分歧上。如果有一百位科学家创建一百条DNA序列,那么一百位收藏家都可以对这些收藏提出专有要求。这些序列的各个生产者保留什么权利

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号